Help - Notice of intention to prosecute

[Ferret]

Jon, I think you're in danger of losing a bit of perspective here. My opinion is that Byelaw 18 prosecutions, although on the increase, are still being heavily outnumbered by PFs, it's just that we don't hear about the umpteen PFs issued on here. We do hear about prosecutions though, presumably because people naively believe that failing to buy a ticket isn't an offence. When they find out to the contrary, panic sets in!

 

[kieron]

Woaaaah!

Do you have any evidence to suggest that the OP is a male? Nothing in the thread so far has confirmed their gender, so I think we should be using terms like "OP" and "they".

I haven't seen any evidence to suggest what sudjules would prefer to be referred to as in this thread. As such, I shall use the terminology I feel most comfortable with. I suggest you do the same.

 

[Ferret]

Are you sure? Surely premeditation is a factor in sentencing?

Well, there you're getting into the realms of byelaw 18 (no intent needed to be proved), and the s.5 of the RoRA where intent does need to be proved. The punishments for the latter will outweigh those for the former!

But in this case rail travel had been paid for, just not with the correct operator.

Meaning that as far as FCC are concerned, rail travel has not been paid for! Argh!

 

[jon0844]

Jon, I think you're in danger of losing a bit of perspective here. My opinion is that Byelaw 18 prosecutions, although on the increase, are still being heavily outnumbered by PFs, it's just that we don't hear about the umpteen PFs issued on here. We do hear about prosecutions though, presumably because people naively believe that failing to buy a ticket isn't an offence. When they find out to the contrary, panic sets in!

I think that my comments are best used in another thread now, as in this case - having refused a PF doesn't leave a lot of choice.

However, it must be noted that FCC now has different teams with different motives - some can only do PFs, some will only go down the MG11 route. It's good to have a team to concentrate on actual fraud (including counterfeit tickets etc) but not if these people then deal with people who deserve a PF.

Anyway, I'm going to end discussion of this (and how FCC is supposedly operating) in here now as it does run the risk of going around in circles.

 

[RJ]

I went on a bit of a fact finding mission the other day.

Greater Anglia operate Cambridge station so presumably, the OP bought the ticket from a Greater Anglia TVM. Greater Anglia, being a successor of a National Express TOC (WAGN) make use of S&B machines. These machines have had a software revamp quite recently to make them easier to use.

Presumably, the OP saw "London Terminals" on the quick options screen. Under this it would have further displayed "GRT ANG TRNSONLY" or "ANY PERMITTED." After selecting the ticket, a screen showing exactly which ticket had been chose would have appeared, before allowing the customer to purchase a ticket. Among other things, the route would have also been shown. It is not possible to buy a ticket from one of those TVMs without that screen showing up.

Whilst many people within this thread claim that "GRT ANG TRNSONLY" is cryptic beyond the point of coherence, I don't think it takes the brains of Britain to work out what it means. However, I accept that some people may genuinely not be able to decipher it. For the OP, the option of going to the ticket office and speaking to a member of staff was available, but the conscious decision was taken not to do this for reasons only known to the OP. Common sense would dictate that anyone unfamiliar with a system would seek assistance from a member of staff. As I said, I would never run into a station in a foreign country, use a ticket machine without understanding exactly what I had been sold, then running onto the first train that appeared to be going in the right direction. Consequently, I refuse to accept that someone else would do that. The type of person that would do this is the type of person who is only ever going to learn the hard way.

Some of the defenses offered by well intending(?) members in this thread are akin to a drowning man clutching at straws and really have no place in a thread where someone is asking for help. Whilst I think that in some cases, FCC are unduly harsh (never more so than in this case where no money was lost,) they have to be given their due for their drive to ensure that all passengers are paying appropriate fares. I make the effort to do so whenever I travel, so everyone else should too.

In terms of outcomes, I don't consider court action or an out of court settlement as a roaring success. The only thing that can be claimed to be a success would be the refunding of the unused outward portion of the ticket held and a charge for the correct ticket. However, given that it was highly unlikely that the OP didn't know what they were doing (unless there's something very seriously wrong) then the out of court settlement should be the pursued option.

 

[jon0844]

I've actually used ticket machines abroad purely because I felt I'd be able to see and understand what I was getting than trying to communicate in English with someone that might not speak it very well.

They often have machines that are very clear and descriptive and offer everything in English. However, I do think our own TVMs can be confusing with a lot of options that someone from abroad might not even realise they need to care about - such as multiple operators.

So, yes, I'd probably recommend speaking to a real person in the UK - but what if your own ability to speak English isn't that good? And what if you're from a place where using a machine is easy and so as soon as you see one, you opt to use it? Is that really something you'd expect nobody to do (especially as TVMs offer different languages) or that they are the "type of person who is only ever going to learn the hard way"? I guess it depends on circumstances that will vary from one person to another and not be as clear cut.

And let's not forget that at some stations, the ticket offices may be closed for times during the day and you'll be expected to use the TVMs. Even Hatfield, which may be open all day, will often have periods where the only person goes on a break and has nobody else to cover - and it's a case of use the TVM or miss a train or two (there's no way to know how long someone will be gone from the window either).

Cambridge is probably staffed all day, but as a whole, there are many variables.

However, nothing that couldn't be fixed by just making the software even more foolproof - especially for people who aren't good with technology.

 

[RJ]

I've actually used ticket machines abroad purely because I felt I'd be able to see and understand what I was getting than trying to communicate in English with someone that might not speak it very well.

They often have machines that are very clear and descriptive and offer everything in English. However, I do think our own TVMs can be confusing with a lot of options that someone from abroad might not even realise they need to care about - such as multiple operators.

So, yes, I'd probably recommend speaking to a real person in the UK - but what if your own ability to speak English isn't that good? And what if you're from a place where using a machine is easy and so as soon as you see one, you opt to use it? Is that really something you'd expect nobody to do (especially as TVMs offer different languages) or that they are the "type of person who is only ever going to learn the hard way"? I guess it depends on circumstances that will vary from one person to another and not be as clear cut.

And let's not forget that at some stations, the ticket offices may be closed for times during the day and you'll be expected to use the TVMs. Even Hatfield, which may be open all day, will often have periods where the only person goes on a break and has nobody else to cover - and it's a case of use the TVM or miss a train or two (there's no way to know how long someone will be gone from the window either).

Cambridge is probably staffed all day, but as a whole, there are many variables.

However, nothing that couldn't be fixed by just making the software even more foolproof - especially for people who aren't good with technology.

To keep things simple (and on topic!) I can only refer to what's given in this specific case. The ticket office was open and there would have been other staff on the station.

The OP never intimated that they had any problem with communicating verbally, they simply did not want to wait for a window to become available. Sad to say, as has been evidenced, the course of events that happened on that day has led to the OP learning the hard way. From choosing not to seek assistance with the ticket purchase, to disputing their liability to pay any Penalty Fare. If they're confident enough to argue with a ticket inspector, then I'm sure they wouldn't have any problem seeking assistance from a ticket office clerk.

If someone does not realise what is and what isn't important to take note of when using a TVM (and doesn't have the intuition to read all of it just in case,) they shouldn't be using it if there is an open ticket office available.

The only way to foolproof machines is to restrict their offering to Anytime (Day) Singles routed Any Permitted only. That way, it'd be almost impossible for people to go wrong without straying onto an unreasonable route.

 

[jon0844]

I do think our TVMs can have a lot of improvements (and many have been discussed on here before) to improve their usability and convey important information, as well as making it quite clear on restrictions - including a requirement to accept that you must have (and carry) a railcard to make the ticket valid.

At the moment, it's not just confusing to read restrictions on a TVM but also very slow - and one wrong press could kick you right back to the start screen.

When you're possibly under pressure to get a ticket quickly (or are waiting behind someone who is struggling) it's very frustrating.

It's interesting to see that the various apps to buy tickets from your smartphone are a lot different and I don't think much research or usability testing was carried out on designing the software people are expected to use. And just as soon as people do learn, they find that it varies from machine to machine and TOC to TOC.

I know this is off topic but I do find some TVMs really cause grief - especially those with resistive touchscreens that need calibrating (making it near impossible to collect reserved tickets as you can't use the keyboard). The machines at King's Cross appear to be capacitive and much easier to operate but still have a rather poor UI.

Sure, regular users now know the layout and may argue different, but if you were designing something from scratch - I doubt you'd end up with what we have today.

 

[RJ]

I have the Chiltern App - I prefer it simply because it has all of the R and U Zone options unlike any of the other apps offered. However, it's of very limited use to me due to the complete lack of a via point. If you want to buy a ticket with a specific route that doesn't have the quickest trains then you're completely out of luck. I see that some of the TOC websites have also omitted the via point field entirely.

I still maintain the point that at present, TVMs do convey important information, but people don't take any notice of it. This thread is a case in point. Some people don't even pay attention to whether they're buying a single or return. What can be done to encourage people to be a bit more savvy when using the machines?

Oh, forgot to mention! I typed Cambridge to London into the local Southern TVM. The route options were Any Permitted and "By LER Trains Only!"

 

[LexyBoy]

The problem with TVMs is that they sell the ticket requested, whereas ticket offices and online engines offer the cheapest fare suited for the passenger's intinerary (unless otherwise requested). An interface more like websites would be a huge improvement - although for this to work properly it would need to show which trains are valid with the selected ticket. A big sign saying "If you are not sure exactly which ticket to buy, please use the ticket office" would do as well.

I appreciate that the TVM will have explained the restriction, but in amongst the other pages of text I find it very reasonable that someone would not fully take it in - especially with a TOC named after the region. Also, many people seem, shockingly, to consider that they travel "on the railway" rather than "on FCC/GC/whoever" - either through wishful thinking or through not actually caring who provides a service*. I don't generally notice or care which operator is running the bus when I'm in London for example.

Anyway, as we have discovered before, there won't be any agreement between the "should read the T&Cs thoughly beforehand" and the "seller should ensure the appropriate fare is sold" camps. And I still haven't heard a convincing argument for the non-excessing of TOC-only tickets, which would have meant the OP wouldn't have ended up even paying a penny more.

* as also exemplified by confused people walking through FGW HSTs' standard coaches, looking at the doilies tutting and saying "no, no, this is all first class - standard must be further down"

 

[Ferret]

Lexy-boy - the only reason TOC-specific tickets cannot be excessed is because the 'Manual' does not allow it. You can draw your own conclusions as to what my views are on the whole subject of TOC-specific tickets.

 

[Yew]

Lexy-boy - the only reason TOC-specific tickets cannot be excessed is because the 'Manual' does not allow it. You can draw your own conclusions as to what my views are on the whole subject of TOC-specific tickets.

And where exactly is this mentiobned in the terms and conditions of the ticket?

 

[RJ]

And where exactly is this mentiobned in the terms and conditions of the ticket?

Everything that you need to know about excesses in covered in the NRCoC!

 

[LexyBoy]

It needs quite a thorough reading to realise that restrictions printed as "ROUTE:" may not be restrictions on the route though...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Lexy-boy - the only reason TOC-specific tickets cannot be excessed is because the 'Manual' does not allow it. You can draw your own conclusions as to what my views are on the whole subject of TOC-specific tickets.

The usual argument is around revenue allocation, which is to me says that the way revenue is allocated needs review, as the same arguments apply to permitted geographic route excesses!

 

[BestWestern]

* as also exemplified by confused people walking through FGW HSTs' standard coaches, looking at the doilies tutting and saying "no, no, this is all first class - standard must be further down"

You are so very right. Ditto on FGW Class 158s, where passengers approach the sliding vestibule doors, see 'First Great Western' emblazoned over them, and go looking for standard

Anyhow, just to chuck another tuppence-worth in, I would argue that a passenger should not have to 'decipher' ticket validity gobbledygook when using an automated purchasing process, however easy or otherwise it might be to work out. As a TVM is aimed at people wishing to make a fairly quick purchase, is there not an argument that such ambiguously labelled and over complex nonsense would be best left for ticket office staff to sell, whereupon they can ensure the intending passenger actually knows what he is getting?!

 

[RPI]

Just one thing, S&B TVM's have 3 or 4 language options available by selecting the relevant national flag. Obviously no good if the OP's language wasn't there though. Operator specific tickets are a bit of a nightmare and the restrictions should be made far clearer thankfully XC have discontinued their own versions now as these used to create problems for us as on the Shere TVM's the cheapest fare is displayed first with a tiny notice within the general text saing "Valid on XC services only" which to joe public means nothing!

 

[snail]

You are so very right. Ditto on FGW Class 158s, where passengers approach the sliding vestibule doors, see 'First Great Western' emblazoned over them, and go looking for standard

Or wander through Coach A looking for their seat which is something like B 37A...

 

[sudjules]

Just wanted to say a BIG thank you to everyone who took the time to help me understand my mistake and gave me advice. Following a letter to the prosecutions Department which was CC'd to the Chief Executive for FCC (who has incidentally not even acknowledge receipt of it, let alone responded!) and to Tim O'Toole the Chief Ex of First group (who has responded with two letters) the whole case has been drooped. Phew.

My advice to anyone else in a similar situation make sure you copy the top people in.


Thanks again

 

[MikeWh]

Great news, thanks for letting us know.